Federal law in 2012 limited primary and general election campaign contributions to $2,500 each, for a total of $5,000, from any individual to any one candidate.

"As we have long said, this Office and the FBI take a zero tolerance approach to corruption of the electoral process," the U.S. Attorney for Manhattan, Preet Bharara, said in a statement released by the Federal Bureau of Investigation. Bharara is an Obama appointee.

According to a recent report issued by the Government Accountability Institute (GAI), people residing in countries around the globe are apparently taking President Obama's declaration a bit too literally and may be flooding the Obama campaign with foreign contributions in violation of federal election law.

The report's authors, Peter Schweizer and Peter Boyer, noted the key finding in a recent article in the Daily Beast: "With millions of online campaign donations ricocheting through cyberspace, one might think the Federal Election Commission would have erected serious walls to guard federal elections from foreign or fraudulent Internet contributions. But that's far from true. In fact, campaigns are largely expected to police these matters themselves."

To repeat: The FEC provides virtually zero oversight for Internet contributions. The political campaigns are responsible for policing themselves.

The prospect of illegal foreign donations is an especially thorny problem for the Obama campaign. Here's why: The Internet site Obama.com isn't owned by the Obama campaign. It's owned by China-based American businessman Robert Roche, CEO of Acorn International, a large media company. As Mr. Schweizer and Mr. Boyer note, 68 percent of the some 2,000 visitors each day on Obama.com are foreign in origin.

The fact is many of these noncitizens could very easily make an illegal contribution to the Obama campaign. Visitors to Obama.com are redirected on the site to a donation page on the campaign's official website, BarackObama.com, and reportedly receive campaign solicitations as well.

This mixing and mingling between the Obama.com website's large foreign following and the Obama campaign website is problem No. 1. Here's problem No. 2: Internet donations continue to flood into the Obama campaign, creating a rich environment for campaign finance fraud.

How much do you want to bet that the illegal foreign donations totalled a lot more than $20,000?

President Obama raised a billion dollars to get re-elected. You have to wonder what kind of scrutiny has fallen on those big donors, especially. D'Souza can't be the only campaign donor in America who is guilty of doing this. And for a lousy $20,000? What kind of a sick joke is this when tens of millions of dollars were pouring into the Obama campaign with zero oversight regarding where the cash came from?

Going after D'Souza is petty politics. He's not an important consevative author or commentator. Recent scandals have tainted his reputation. But "2016" was the second highest grossing political documentary of all time and savaged the president mericlessly.

Reason enough in Obama's mind to destroy him.

Dinesh D'Souza, a best selling author and creator of the documentary "2016: Obama's America" has been indicted for election fraud and causing false statement to be made to the FBI.

The indictment alleges that D'Souza reimbursed some people for giving campaign contributions to a Senate candidate from New York. The amount that was allegedly donated was $20,000.

Federal law in 2012 limited primary and general election campaign contributions to $2,500 each, for a total of $5,000, from any individual to any one candidate.

"As we have long said, this Office and the FBI take a zero tolerance approach to corruption of the electoral process," the U.S. Attorney for Manhattan, Preet Bharara, said in a statement released by the Federal Bureau of Investigation. Bharara is an Obama appointee.

According to a recent report issued by the Government Accountability Institute (GAI), people residing in countries around the globe are apparently taking President Obama's declaration a bit too literally and may be flooding the Obama campaign with foreign contributions in violation of federal election law.

The report's authors, Peter Schweizer and Peter Boyer, noted the key finding in a recent article in the Daily Beast: "With millions of online campaign donations ricocheting through cyberspace, one might think the Federal Election Commission would have erected serious walls to guard federal elections from foreign or fraudulent Internet contributions. But that's far from true. In fact, campaigns are largely expected to police these matters themselves."

To repeat: The FEC provides virtually zero oversight for Internet contributions. The political campaigns are responsible for policing themselves.

The prospect of illegal foreign donations is an especially thorny problem for the Obama campaign. Here's why: The Internet site Obama.com isn't owned by the Obama campaign. It's owned by China-based American businessman Robert Roche, CEO of Acorn International, a large media company. As Mr. Schweizer and Mr. Boyer note, 68 percent of the some 2,000 visitors each day on Obama.com are foreign in origin.

The fact is many of these noncitizens could very easily make an illegal contribution to the Obama campaign. Visitors to Obama.com are redirected on the site to a donation page on the campaign's official website, BarackObama.com, and reportedly receive campaign solicitations as well.

This mixing and mingling between the Obama.com website's large foreign following and the Obama campaign website is problem No. 1. Here's problem No. 2: Internet donations continue to flood into the Obama campaign, creating a rich environment for campaign finance fraud.

How much do you want to bet that the illegal foreign donations totalled a lot more than $20,000?

President Obama raised a billion dollars to get re-elected. You have to wonder what kind of scrutiny has fallen on those big donors, especially. D'Souza can't be the only campaign donor in America who is guilty of doing this. And for a lousy $20,000? What kind of a sick joke is this when tens of millions of dollars were pouring into the Obama campaign with zero oversight regarding where the cash came from?

Going after D'Souza is petty politics. He's not an important consevative author or commentator. Recent scandals have tainted his reputation. But "2016" was the second highest grossing political documentary of all time and savaged the president mericlessly.